A study published on Friday appears to confirm what news reports suggested long ago: President Trump’s campaign rallies were associated with a rise in violence when they came to town.

A city that hosted a Trump rally saw an average of 2.3 more assaults reported on the day of the event than on a typical day, according to the study, led by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania and published in the journal Epidemiology. The authors found no corresponding link between assaults and rallies for Mr. Trump’s Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton.

“It appeared to be a phenomenon that’s unique to Donald Trump’s rally,” said Christopher Morrison, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Pennsylvania and the lead author of the study.

It may come as little surprise that the rallies were associated with increased violence, as the often volcanic clashes between Mr. Trump’s supporters and opponents were widely covered at the time.

In March 2016 alone, a Trump rally in Chicago was called off after violent clashes broke out, while an anti-Trump protester was punched at a rally in North Carolina and another was punched and kicked at a rally in Arizona. The following month, several Trump supporters were assaulted at a California rally. …

The supporters also often aimed offensive and violent rhetoric at Mrs. Clinton, suggesting she be killed. …

The researchers offered two explanations for the increase in assaults. Either they were the result of clashes at or near the rallies, or they occurred elsewhere in the cities after the aggressive mood on display by Mr. Trump, his supporters or his opponents had spread through “social contagion.”

It’s like how when Charles Murray came to Middlebury to talk about social science findings, violence broke out.

The audacious real estate project – branded Powder Mountain – is becoming a mecca for altruistically minded members of the global elite. “The goal will always remain the same,” says Elliott Bisnow, Rosenthal’s business partner: “To be a beacon of inspiration and a light in the world.”

Thanks for the link, Cowboy. Un-frickin'-believable! Here was my response to the article:

Are these the most self-unaware people on earth? While reading this, I kept asking myself whether this was for real, or whether it was one of those old Christopher Guest mockumentaries, like Best in Show or This is Spinal Tap.

Such hype might seem detached from reality, but it is much in vogue among the technology sector’s new generation of millionaires and billionaires, who seem keen to distance themselves from the selfish excess of their predecessors from 1980s Wall Street.

Maybe that's why movies like The Wolf of Wall Street are so popular: as shitty as the banksters are in many respects, people are actually starting to miss the era when we still had billionaires who enjoyed being billionaires. Maybe that's part of the reason behind the Trump phenomenon, too. Now, instead, we've got these whiney, lachrymose tech-billionaires who were all raised on Nirvana and want to be 'authentic'. Pitiful.

Which is probably why Silicon Valley is so keen on collaborating with the government these days to introduce internet-censorship. Musn't have the plebeians figuring out who's really running the show in this society!

Altruism is a powerful marketing brand, and Rosenthal and his friends have become experts at using the idea to promote their business. But when I ask exactly what they’ve been doing for the public good outside of their conferences, little appears to be happening.

These people should hook up with the Clinton Foundation.

Chawla is a minor celebrity on Instagram. Several years ago, he created a stir with the launch of an app called Lovematically that automatically “liked” every post on a user’s feed.

Oh, that's nice: a narcissist marketing narcissism.

Well folks, if you all thought 'Davos Man' was bad, get ready for Powder Mountain Man!

Summit prides itself on its progressive “content”, with talks about global warming, inequality, racial divisions and the war in Syria, but there is a celebrity draw, with talks such as “Jessica Alba on defying expectations” and “Andre Agassi on scaling change”.

I guess if you're going to sit through a talk about inequality, the best place to do it is in an exclusive ski resort, surrounded by billionaires.

And I also guess that, if I wanted to know about "scaling change", I'd ask the guy who helped make the Official All-Star Cafe such a roaring success.

It's funny that these people are all internet people. I always thought that the whole idea of the internet was to make it so that, if you wanted to hear someone give a speech on ineqaulity, you didn't have to fly to some exclusive resort in Utah. You could just go on the internet, and there it was. Why are these billionaires hoarding all this great information about defying expectations for themselves, and refusing to share it with the common man, for whom they have such unlimited concern?

I would suggest that they bring in a real conservative, not even to do op-eds or reporting, but just to vet some of these stories, but I’m afraid they don’t like that sort of diversity, and David Brooks just would not be able to do the job. I don’t believe he could even simulate conservatism in a mind game for his own profit.

Either they were the result of clashes at or near the rallies, or they occurred elsewhere in the cities after the aggressive mood on display by Mr. Trump, his supporters or his opponents had spread through “social contagion.”

So let’s see, it could be either the recorded and generally known fact that the left habitually confuses “protesting” and “demonstrating” with shouting down, obstructing and physically assaulting people expressing opinions it dislikes, and that Trump supporters and rallies were regularly so treated, or it could be some kind of spooky social action at a distance.

It's a fairly simple psychological process, whereby they project the feelings of murderous rage, which in their mind is caused by Trump, unto Trump and his supporters. Mixed with years of watching movies featuring KKK/blonde beast villains.

And certainly no on showed up to counter-protest. The prog-left has it in their mind that they're entitled to crash any party they're not welcome at, and then should be treated like they're the main attraction, rather than the fart in an elevator that they are.

Even if you know nothing at all about fighting, its obvious that Bruce Lee is a phony. He has all these wide open punches that are cinematic but are also very poor technique. I have held my silence for years as his reputation has a superstar pugilist has soared. I loved all the Bruce Lee films but please - get real.

I imagine that in the first century much the same sort of thing happened to Jesus. He was dead and so his acolytes had no restraint on their increasingly wild tales about him. Lee was a 135 lb guy who never fought in an officially sanctioned event. His reputation was from fighting in TV and films where his opponents just fell down where and when required in the script.

This is akin to believing that Bela Lugosi was a real vampire. Or somewhere in the Dark Continent there really is a Wakanda.

We literally have Clinton staffers on tape talking about provoking violence (“bird-dogging”), and there have been plenty of real anti-Trump-supporter attacks abetted by the local police, and plenty of hate hoaxes exposed. But this article seems to tie in well with what I heard on NPR today: aggressively pushing on with all their lies. A local radio story gave a backwards view of the fake news phenomenon (“I for one am tired of people dismissing something as fake news when they don’t agree with it” — join the club, pal) by way of introducing yet another explicitly leftist fact-checking think tank (this one tied to U of M); then on the national radio, almost every single story was nonspecific scaremongering about Russia.
The one time they weren’t lying about Russia they were pushing the fake news that McMaster is out. Cleverly: they technically didn’t say that McMaster was out. They just danced around the possibility that anonymous sources may have intimated that McMaster might have been leaving soon. Somewhere deep in there they did mention the White House saying that that was wrong; I think that was after they laughed and laughed about how unstable this White House is. Same thing with Russia. They never actually say anything about Russia, but any non-critical listener who has them on the background all day (which is an awful lot of NPR listeners) would definitely come away with the idea that Putin is our greatest threat at present. Of course that’s the point.
If you’re familiar with the standard Jew complaints about defamation, you can go right down the line and see NPR doing everything, not in specific accusations, but in how the defamation is launched. It’s like they only know one play-book.
But apart from reports that leftist legacy media news sites gained a notable increase in clicks following Zuckerberg’s rewrite of Facebook news rules (((what a coincidence!))), they’re still dying and they know it. Even that increase in clicks was merely a percentage of Facebook users, who are themselves leaving the platform.
NPR is also difficult to listen to on aesthetic grounds. All the NPR hosts are women who over-emoteeverylast syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it’s the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way. I remember newscasters trying to be neutral or at least give an overall impression of neutrality. Getting clumsily emotionally tugged on during every sentence is exhausting by itself and would be if they weren’t liars pushing fake news.
Oh and one more thing. On the next On The Media, someone claiming to have paid any attention to American journalism for the past three years has decided that there just isn’t enough coverage of Syrian refugees, especially those serving as human shields for Salafist terrorists. I am not making this up. They are asking for one more Beach Kid, one more interview with a family struggling to knead dough in the latest Ultimate Bakery. I have yet to hear anything on NPR about Orthodox victims of Salafists, but every single asteroid-circling moon god worshipper who stubs his toe gets a factless and emotionalistic cooing session. The obvious result of that is resentment, but don’t let the journalists know that.
*It’s not a dog whistle, O komissar from Act Up. My problem with these men is precisely that their voices are so irritating. I have worked well with out homosexuals in construction jobs, who, go figure, talked with normal voices and resented people who talk in an irritating, effected manner.

All the NPR hosts are women who over-emote every last syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it’s the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQSO0RbmHBI

If I were locked in a room and forced to listen to NPR, I'd probably end up pulling a double Van Gogh. (Watching CNN with the sound *off* makes me want to gouge my eyes out.)

This morning, I sat down in a waiting room and noticed some dead-tree fish-wrappers, including the latest editions of the WSJ and the NYT, lying on a nearby table. Out of pure masochism, I decided to look at the NYT first.

As I picked up the pristine, evidently-never-opened paper to begin my perusal, the Business Day and Weekend sections promptly plopped out onto the carpeted floor. As I bent down to retrieve them, I loosened my grip on the A section. This action somehow caused most of the inside pages of that section to come tumbling out onto the floor, as well.

At this moment, vaguely disgusted by the sight of a newspaper's guts strewn about my feet like the entrails of a disemboweled animal, I caught a glimpse of the back pages of the A section and read the headline of the top editorial: "Finally, Trump Says Something Bad About Russia." My fast-moving eyes noted that the cartoon featured an oddly-drawn rendering of Trump.

In disgust, I tossed the remnants of the A section onto the floor to gather dust with the lesser sections.

This act - an autonomic reflex triggered by my severe allergy to bullshit - was surprisingly pleasurable. It felt so good to be able to express my contempt for the soulless media machine with a physical gesture - a contemptuous flick of the wrist. I found myself wishing that I had a huge stack of NYTs that I could start tossing around like confetti.

At the time, I was alone in the room. For the briefest of moments, I considered indulging myself and using my shoes to grind the dismembered remains of the Old Gray Lady into pulp, but then I remembered my manners. Grudgingly, I bent down, picked up the disjointed pages, shuffled them together into a crumpled casserole of newsprint, and nonchalantly tossed the messy pile back onto the table.

In this day and age, any man who hopes to preserve his sanity would be well-advised to avoid exposure to Da Nooz MeeDeeUh at all costs.

Are you sure? The guy in the dark blue T-Shirt has a better watch. Derbyshire is a math-oriented guy, I'll be he has an expensive watch. And the striped-shirt guy gets his ass kicked, but the dark blue T-Shirt guy doesn't.

Sessions has not been aggressive enough (or as bad as some people say he is) but when he wakes up somebody ought to make sure he understands that there is no first amendment right to riot. I would go past that. It is screamingly clear that a small group of centrally organized professionals has been exploiting our freedoms to physically attack the public order in the hopes of legislatively attacking our government. When you fail to crush revolutionaries, they will not fail to crush you.

Are you sure? The guy in the dark blue T-Shirt has a better watch. Derbyshire is a math-oriented guy, I’ll be he has an expensive watch. And the striped-shirt guy gets his ass kicked, but the dark blue T-Shirt guy doesn’t.

Are you sure? The guy in the dark blue T-Shirt has a better watch. Derbyshire is a math-oriented guy, I'll be he has an expensive watch. And the striped-shirt guy gets his ass kicked, but the dark blue T-Shirt guy doesn't.

“A city that hosted a Trump rally saw an average of 2.3 more assaults reported on the day of the event than on a typical day”

well there you go–thinking that maybe HB-1 wonder ment to say “2.3 “times” more”? An assault here or an assault there… or maybe even “2.3 fewer” assaults?… I would love to write for the NYT as they has no standards and they-is has awesomest pensions!!…

We literally have Clinton staffers on tape talking about provoking violence ("bird-dogging"), and there have been plenty of real anti-Trump-supporter attacks abetted by the local police, and plenty of hate hoaxes exposed. But this article seems to tie in well with what I heard on NPR today: aggressively pushing on with all their lies. A local radio story gave a backwards view of the fake news phenomenon ("I for one am tired of people dismissing something as fake news when they don't agree with it" -- join the club, pal) by way of introducing yet another explicitly leftist fact-checking think tank (this one tied to U of M); then on the national radio, almost every single story was nonspecific scaremongering about Russia.
The one time they weren't lying about Russia they were pushing the fake news that McMaster is out. Cleverly: they technically didn't say that McMaster was out. They just danced around the possibility that anonymous sources may have intimated that McMaster might have been leaving soon. Somewhere deep in there they did mention the White House saying that that was wrong; I think that was after they laughed and laughed about how unstable this White House is. Same thing with Russia. They never actually say anything about Russia, but any non-critical listener who has them on the background all day (which is an awful lot of NPR listeners) would definitely come away with the idea that Putin is our greatest threat at present. Of course that's the point.
If you're familiar with the standard Jew complaints about defamation, you can go right down the line and see NPR doing everything, not in specific accusations, but in how the defamation is launched. It's like they only know one play-book.
But apart from reports that leftist legacy media news sites gained a notable increase in clicks following Zuckerberg's rewrite of Facebook news rules (((what a coincidence!))), they're still dying and they know it. Even that increase in clicks was merely a percentage of Facebook users, who are themselves leaving the platform.
NPR is also difficult to listen to on aesthetic grounds. All the NPR hosts are women who over-emoteeverylast syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it's the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way. I remember newscasters trying to be neutral or at least give an overall impression of neutrality. Getting clumsily emotionally tugged on during every sentence is exhausting by itself and would be if they weren't liars pushing fake news.
Oh and one more thing. On the next On The Media, someone claiming to have paid any attention to American journalism for the past three years has decided that there just isn't enough coverage of Syrian refugees, especially those serving as human shields for Salafist terrorists. I am not making this up. They are asking for one more Beach Kid, one more interview with a family struggling to knead dough in the latest Ultimate Bakery. I have yet to hear anything on NPR about Orthodox victims of Salafists, but every single asteroid-circling moon god worshipper who stubs his toe gets a factless and emotionalistic cooing session. The obvious result of that is resentment, but don't let the journalists know that.
*It's not a dog whistle, O komissar from Act Up. My problem with these men is precisely that their voices are so irritating. I have worked well with out homosexuals in construction jobs, who, go figure, talked with normal voices and resented people who talk in an irritating, effected manner.

I have worked well with out homosexuals in construction jobs, who, go figure, talked with normal voices and resented people who talk in an irritating, affected manner.

I did a ctrl-F for ‘Dayton”. No match. I did a ctrl-F for ” Thomas DiMassimo”. No match. For those who do not remember, here is a clip of DiMassimo at a Trump rally in Dayton in March 2016.

The violence happens because the left feels the need to shut down their opponents. And the media and local police authorities give them license to do so. For example, CNN gave a public platform to the aforementioned Mr. DiMassimo after he tried to attack Trump. Would they have done the same for someone who rushed Hillary?

You will note any presidential voting map always shows a sea of red in flyover country dotted by blue dots of urban outposts. Holding rallies in any urban area means being at the mercy of the local democrat politicians and police force. And that doesn’t work out well for republicans.

Either they were the result of clashes at or near the rallies, or they occurred elsewhere in the cities after the aggressive mood on display by Mr. Trump, his supporters or his opponents had spread through “social contagion.”

So let's see, it could be either the recorded and generally known fact that the left habitually confuses "protesting" and "demonstrating" with shouting down, obstructing and physically assaulting people expressing opinions it dislikes, and that Trump supporters and rallies were regularly so treated, or it could be some kind of spooky social action at a distance.

That's a toughie, eh?

It’s a fairly simple psychological process, whereby they project the feelings of murderous rage, which in their mind is caused by Trump, unto Trump and his supporters. Mixed with years of watching movies featuring KKK/blonde beast villains.

The audacious real estate project – branded Powder Mountain – is becoming a mecca for altruistically minded members of the global elite. “The goal will always remain the same,” says Elliott Bisnow, Rosenthal’s business partner: “To be a beacon of inspiration and a light in the world.”

We literally have Clinton staffers on tape talking about provoking violence ("bird-dogging"), and there have been plenty of real anti-Trump-supporter attacks abetted by the local police, and plenty of hate hoaxes exposed. But this article seems to tie in well with what I heard on NPR today: aggressively pushing on with all their lies. A local radio story gave a backwards view of the fake news phenomenon ("I for one am tired of people dismissing something as fake news when they don't agree with it" -- join the club, pal) by way of introducing yet another explicitly leftist fact-checking think tank (this one tied to U of M); then on the national radio, almost every single story was nonspecific scaremongering about Russia.
The one time they weren't lying about Russia they were pushing the fake news that McMaster is out. Cleverly: they technically didn't say that McMaster was out. They just danced around the possibility that anonymous sources may have intimated that McMaster might have been leaving soon. Somewhere deep in there they did mention the White House saying that that was wrong; I think that was after they laughed and laughed about how unstable this White House is. Same thing with Russia. They never actually say anything about Russia, but any non-critical listener who has them on the background all day (which is an awful lot of NPR listeners) would definitely come away with the idea that Putin is our greatest threat at present. Of course that's the point.
If you're familiar with the standard Jew complaints about defamation, you can go right down the line and see NPR doing everything, not in specific accusations, but in how the defamation is launched. It's like they only know one play-book.
But apart from reports that leftist legacy media news sites gained a notable increase in clicks following Zuckerberg's rewrite of Facebook news rules (((what a coincidence!))), they're still dying and they know it. Even that increase in clicks was merely a percentage of Facebook users, who are themselves leaving the platform.
NPR is also difficult to listen to on aesthetic grounds. All the NPR hosts are women who over-emoteeverylast syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it's the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way. I remember newscasters trying to be neutral or at least give an overall impression of neutrality. Getting clumsily emotionally tugged on during every sentence is exhausting by itself and would be if they weren't liars pushing fake news.
Oh and one more thing. On the next On The Media, someone claiming to have paid any attention to American journalism for the past three years has decided that there just isn't enough coverage of Syrian refugees, especially those serving as human shields for Salafist terrorists. I am not making this up. They are asking for one more Beach Kid, one more interview with a family struggling to knead dough in the latest Ultimate Bakery. I have yet to hear anything on NPR about Orthodox victims of Salafists, but every single asteroid-circling moon god worshipper who stubs his toe gets a factless and emotionalistic cooing session. The obvious result of that is resentment, but don't let the journalists know that.
*It's not a dog whistle, O komissar from Act Up. My problem with these men is precisely that their voices are so irritating. I have worked well with out homosexuals in construction jobs, who, go figure, talked with normal voices and resented people who talk in an irritating, effected manner.

All the NPR hosts are women who over-emote every last syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it’s the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way

If I were locked in a room and forced to listen to NPR, I’d probably end up pulling a double Van Gogh. (Watching CNN with the sound *off* makes me want to gouge my eyes out.)

This morning, I sat down in a waiting room and noticed some dead-tree fish-wrappers, including the latest editions of the WSJ and the NYT, lying on a nearby table. Out of pure masochism, I decided to look at the NYT first.

As I picked up the pristine, evidently-never-opened paper to begin my perusal, the Business Day and Weekend sections promptly plopped out onto the carpeted floor. As I bent down to retrieve them, I loosened my grip on the A section. This action somehow caused most of the inside pages of that section to come tumbling out onto the floor, as well.

At this moment, vaguely disgusted by the sight of a newspaper’s guts strewn about my feet like the entrails of a disemboweled animal, I caught a glimpse of the back pages of the A section and read the headline of the top editorial: “Finally, Trump Says Something Bad About Russia.” My fast-moving eyes noted that the cartoon featured an oddly-drawn rendering of Trump.

In disgust, I tossed the remnants of the A section onto the floor to gather dust with the lesser sections.

This act – an autonomic reflex triggered by my severe allergy to bullshit – was surprisingly pleasurable. It felt so good to be able to express my contempt for the soulless media machine with a physical gesture – a contemptuous flick of the wrist. I found myself wishing that I had a huge stack of NYTs that I could start tossing around like confetti.

At the time, I was alone in the room. For the briefest of moments, I considered indulging myself and using my shoes to grind the dismembered remains of the Old Gray Lady into pulp, but then I remembered my manners. Grudgingly, I bent down, picked up the disjointed pages, shuffled them together into a crumpled casserole of newsprint, and nonchalantly tossed the messy pile back onto the table.

In this day and age, any man who hopes to preserve his sanity would be well-advised to avoid exposure to Da Nooz MeeDeeUh at all costs.

Imagine thinking that it matters what you do with a copy of a printed newspaper. A sad and over-elaborate description of just how ineffectual we all are. You may have meant for your remarks to be uplifting and even rebellious, but in the end they are depressing and dispiriting. Sorry.

This is a very charming rant, both from JRoss and yourself. Personally, I quit TV news back in the 80's for being too commie. Newspapers, which can only be read in my voice, I let go in the early 90's. That was when the blessings of talk Radio really took off and suddenly I had news sources that wouldn't give me hives.

I have never willingly listened to NPR because the few times I was forced to hear it, I was reminded of why I turned off TV news almost 40 years ago. It's diabolical. Like Satan himself is in the room telling you lies that will make the rest of history wicked and destructive.

All the NPR hosts are women who over-emote every last syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it’s the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQSO0RbmHBI

If I were locked in a room and forced to listen to NPR, I'd probably end up pulling a double Van Gogh. (Watching CNN with the sound *off* makes me want to gouge my eyes out.)

This morning, I sat down in a waiting room and noticed some dead-tree fish-wrappers, including the latest editions of the WSJ and the NYT, lying on a nearby table. Out of pure masochism, I decided to look at the NYT first.

As I picked up the pristine, evidently-never-opened paper to begin my perusal, the Business Day and Weekend sections promptly plopped out onto the carpeted floor. As I bent down to retrieve them, I loosened my grip on the A section. This action somehow caused most of the inside pages of that section to come tumbling out onto the floor, as well.

At this moment, vaguely disgusted by the sight of a newspaper's guts strewn about my feet like the entrails of a disemboweled animal, I caught a glimpse of the back pages of the A section and read the headline of the top editorial: "Finally, Trump Says Something Bad About Russia." My fast-moving eyes noted that the cartoon featured an oddly-drawn rendering of Trump.

In disgust, I tossed the remnants of the A section onto the floor to gather dust with the lesser sections.

This act - an autonomic reflex triggered by my severe allergy to bullshit - was surprisingly pleasurable. It felt so good to be able to express my contempt for the soulless media machine with a physical gesture - a contemptuous flick of the wrist. I found myself wishing that I had a huge stack of NYTs that I could start tossing around like confetti.

At the time, I was alone in the room. For the briefest of moments, I considered indulging myself and using my shoes to grind the dismembered remains of the Old Gray Lady into pulp, but then I remembered my manners. Grudgingly, I bent down, picked up the disjointed pages, shuffled them together into a crumpled casserole of newsprint, and nonchalantly tossed the messy pile back onto the table.

In this day and age, any man who hopes to preserve his sanity would be well-advised to avoid exposure to Da Nooz MeeDeeUh at all costs.

Imagine thinking that it matters what you do with a copy of a printed newspaper. A sad and over-elaborate description of just how ineffectual we all are. You may have meant for your remarks to be uplifting and even rebellious, but in the end they are depressing and dispiriting. Sorry.

All the NPR hosts are women who over-emote every last syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it’s the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQSO0RbmHBI

If I were locked in a room and forced to listen to NPR, I'd probably end up pulling a double Van Gogh. (Watching CNN with the sound *off* makes me want to gouge my eyes out.)

This morning, I sat down in a waiting room and noticed some dead-tree fish-wrappers, including the latest editions of the WSJ and the NYT, lying on a nearby table. Out of pure masochism, I decided to look at the NYT first.

As I picked up the pristine, evidently-never-opened paper to begin my perusal, the Business Day and Weekend sections promptly plopped out onto the carpeted floor. As I bent down to retrieve them, I loosened my grip on the A section. This action somehow caused most of the inside pages of that section to come tumbling out onto the floor, as well.

At this moment, vaguely disgusted by the sight of a newspaper's guts strewn about my feet like the entrails of a disemboweled animal, I caught a glimpse of the back pages of the A section and read the headline of the top editorial: "Finally, Trump Says Something Bad About Russia." My fast-moving eyes noted that the cartoon featured an oddly-drawn rendering of Trump.

In disgust, I tossed the remnants of the A section onto the floor to gather dust with the lesser sections.

This act - an autonomic reflex triggered by my severe allergy to bullshit - was surprisingly pleasurable. It felt so good to be able to express my contempt for the soulless media machine with a physical gesture - a contemptuous flick of the wrist. I found myself wishing that I had a huge stack of NYTs that I could start tossing around like confetti.

At the time, I was alone in the room. For the briefest of moments, I considered indulging myself and using my shoes to grind the dismembered remains of the Old Gray Lady into pulp, but then I remembered my manners. Grudgingly, I bent down, picked up the disjointed pages, shuffled them together into a crumpled casserole of newsprint, and nonchalantly tossed the messy pile back onto the table.

In this day and age, any man who hopes to preserve his sanity would be well-advised to avoid exposure to Da Nooz MeeDeeUh at all costs.

You were in a waiting room? A doctor’s waiting room? My diagnosis is Parkinsonism, or vandalism. I could narrow it down after further testing.

Thanks for the link, Cowboy. Un-frickin’-believable! Here was my response to the article:

Are these the most self-unaware people on earth? While reading this, I kept asking myself whether this was for real, or whether it was one of those old Christopher Guest mockumentaries, like Best in Show or This is Spinal Tap.

Such hype might seem detached from reality, but it is much in vogue among the technology sector’s new generation of millionaires and billionaires, who seem keen to distance themselves from the selfish excess of their predecessors from 1980s Wall Street.

Maybe that’s why movies like The Wolf of Wall Street are so popular: as shitty as the banksters are in many respects, people are actually starting to miss the era when we still had billionaires who enjoyed being billionaires. Maybe that’s part of the reason behind the Trump phenomenon, too. Now, instead, we’ve got these whiney, lachrymose tech-billionaires who were all raised on Nirvana and want to be ‘authentic’. Pitiful.

Which is probably why Silicon Valley is so keen on collaborating with the government these days to introduce internet-censorship. Musn’t have the plebeians figuring out who’s really running the show in this society!

Altruism is a powerful marketing brand, and Rosenthal and his friends have become experts at using the idea to promote their business. But when I ask exactly what they’ve been doing for the public good outside of their conferences, little appears to be happening.

These people should hook up with the Clinton Foundation.

Chawla is a minor celebrity on Instagram. Several years ago, he created a stir with the launch of an app called Lovematically that automatically “liked” every post on a user’s feed.

Oh, that’s nice: a narcissist marketing narcissism.

Well folks, if you all thought ‘Davos Man’ was bad, get ready for Powder Mountain Man!

Note the journal that published this “study”: Epidemiology. It’s a neat trick: recruit a real science to lend its prestige to your baldly political message that actually has little to do with that science.

This is an aspect of the “long march through the institutions” and it’s everywhere. Right after the Parkland shooting, some Obama holdover was complaining on NPR that Trump has cut off funding that the Center for Disease Control was using to study gun violence.

The first time I became aware of this phenomenon was in the 1980s, when I realized the Harvard School of Public Health had dedicated itself to spreading disinformation about AIDS (i.e. downplaying the gay angle to spread fear that “anyone” could get AIDS).

I was long time subscriber to the New York Times print edition and spent at least two hours a day reading the paper. Later I read it daily on line. Over time I read it less and less. Now I will glance at their home page every other or third day. What I see or read scares me.

Looking at the New York Times now is like running into a friend that was once your closest friend that had drifted away. Instead of a happy reunion, it’s a disturbing experience. Your once close friend now babnles on about

All the NPR hosts are women who over-emote every last syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it’s the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQSO0RbmHBI

If I were locked in a room and forced to listen to NPR, I'd probably end up pulling a double Van Gogh. (Watching CNN with the sound *off* makes me want to gouge my eyes out.)

This morning, I sat down in a waiting room and noticed some dead-tree fish-wrappers, including the latest editions of the WSJ and the NYT, lying on a nearby table. Out of pure masochism, I decided to look at the NYT first.

As I picked up the pristine, evidently-never-opened paper to begin my perusal, the Business Day and Weekend sections promptly plopped out onto the carpeted floor. As I bent down to retrieve them, I loosened my grip on the A section. This action somehow caused most of the inside pages of that section to come tumbling out onto the floor, as well.

At this moment, vaguely disgusted by the sight of a newspaper's guts strewn about my feet like the entrails of a disemboweled animal, I caught a glimpse of the back pages of the A section and read the headline of the top editorial: "Finally, Trump Says Something Bad About Russia." My fast-moving eyes noted that the cartoon featured an oddly-drawn rendering of Trump.

In disgust, I tossed the remnants of the A section onto the floor to gather dust with the lesser sections.

This act - an autonomic reflex triggered by my severe allergy to bullshit - was surprisingly pleasurable. It felt so good to be able to express my contempt for the soulless media machine with a physical gesture - a contemptuous flick of the wrist. I found myself wishing that I had a huge stack of NYTs that I could start tossing around like confetti.

At the time, I was alone in the room. For the briefest of moments, I considered indulging myself and using my shoes to grind the dismembered remains of the Old Gray Lady into pulp, but then I remembered my manners. Grudgingly, I bent down, picked up the disjointed pages, shuffled them together into a crumpled casserole of newsprint, and nonchalantly tossed the messy pile back onto the table.

In this day and age, any man who hopes to preserve his sanity would be well-advised to avoid exposure to Da Nooz MeeDeeUh at all costs.

This is a very charming rant, both from JRoss and yourself. Personally, I quit TV news back in the 80′s for being too commie. Newspapers, which can only be read in my voice, I let go in the early 90′s. That was when the blessings of talk Radio really took off and suddenly I had news sources that wouldn’t give me hives.

I have never willingly listened to NPR because the few times I was forced to hear it, I was reminded of why I turned off TV news almost 40 years ago. It’s diabolical. Like Satan himself is in the room telling you lies that will make the rest of history wicked and destructive.

I was in a bus station waiting room on Saturday with about a dozen other people and two pigeons. I was the only white person. Two TVs were tuned to CNN, which was practically peeing its pants with excitement over McCabe's firing, and no one was paying the slightest bit of attention.

Agree about NPR. The government should not be in the media business, no matter what the politics.

The article is silent as to whether or not there were anti-Clinton protesters at the Clinton rallies though it does reference anti-Trump protesters having attended the TRUMP rallies. Isn’t it reasonable to think that there were anti-Clinton protesters present at her rallies? Or were they somehow forbidden by The Powers That Be to attend? And if the latter, why weren’t the anti-Trump protesters similarly forbidden to attend Trump rallies?

Even if you know nothing at all about fighting, its obvious that Bruce Lee is a phony. He has all these wide open punches that are cinematic but are also very poor technique. I have held my silence for years as his reputation has a superstar pugilist has soared. I loved all the Bruce Lee films but please – get real.

I imagine that in the first century much the same sort of thing happened to Jesus. He was dead and so his acolytes had no restraint on their increasingly wild tales about him. Lee was a 135 lb guy who never fought in an officially sanctioned event. His reputation was from fighting in TV and films where his opponents just fell down where and when required in the script.

This is akin to believing that Bela Lugosi was a real vampire. Or somewhere in the Dark Continent there really is a Wakanda.

We literally have Clinton staffers on tape talking about provoking violence ("bird-dogging"), and there have been plenty of real anti-Trump-supporter attacks abetted by the local police, and plenty of hate hoaxes exposed. But this article seems to tie in well with what I heard on NPR today: aggressively pushing on with all their lies. A local radio story gave a backwards view of the fake news phenomenon ("I for one am tired of people dismissing something as fake news when they don't agree with it" -- join the club, pal) by way of introducing yet another explicitly leftist fact-checking think tank (this one tied to U of M); then on the national radio, almost every single story was nonspecific scaremongering about Russia.
The one time they weren't lying about Russia they were pushing the fake news that McMaster is out. Cleverly: they technically didn't say that McMaster was out. They just danced around the possibility that anonymous sources may have intimated that McMaster might have been leaving soon. Somewhere deep in there they did mention the White House saying that that was wrong; I think that was after they laughed and laughed about how unstable this White House is. Same thing with Russia. They never actually say anything about Russia, but any non-critical listener who has them on the background all day (which is an awful lot of NPR listeners) would definitely come away with the idea that Putin is our greatest threat at present. Of course that's the point.
If you're familiar with the standard Jew complaints about defamation, you can go right down the line and see NPR doing everything, not in specific accusations, but in how the defamation is launched. It's like they only know one play-book.
But apart from reports that leftist legacy media news sites gained a notable increase in clicks following Zuckerberg's rewrite of Facebook news rules (((what a coincidence!))), they're still dying and they know it. Even that increase in clicks was merely a percentage of Facebook users, who are themselves leaving the platform.
NPR is also difficult to listen to on aesthetic grounds. All the NPR hosts are women who over-emoteeverylast syllable like pushy helicopter moms nagging their kid to make any choice he likes so long as it's the intelligent one, or, gentle-voiced men* (often, but not always, with a lisp), who pretty much talk the same way. I remember newscasters trying to be neutral or at least give an overall impression of neutrality. Getting clumsily emotionally tugged on during every sentence is exhausting by itself and would be if they weren't liars pushing fake news.
Oh and one more thing. On the next On The Media, someone claiming to have paid any attention to American journalism for the past three years has decided that there just isn't enough coverage of Syrian refugees, especially those serving as human shields for Salafist terrorists. I am not making this up. They are asking for one more Beach Kid, one more interview with a family struggling to knead dough in the latest Ultimate Bakery. I have yet to hear anything on NPR about Orthodox victims of Salafists, but every single asteroid-circling moon god worshipper who stubs his toe gets a factless and emotionalistic cooing session. The obvious result of that is resentment, but don't let the journalists know that.
*It's not a dog whistle, O komissar from Act Up. My problem with these men is precisely that their voices are so irritating. I have worked well with out homosexuals in construction jobs, who, go figure, talked with normal voices and resented people who talk in an irritating, effected manner.

Every tragedy has a bright side. That’s ancient folk wisdom I just made up.

My beloved red turbo charged Supra convertible finally died. I’m crushed – I loved that car – but it had one flaw as a vehicle. The radio was stuck on NPR.

My replacement Honda is very boring but at least I have other choices besides Public Radio or silence.

Even if you know nothing at all about fighting, its obvious that Bruce Lee is a phony. He has all these wide open punches that are cinematic but are also very poor technique. I have held my silence for years as his reputation has a superstar pugilist has soared. I loved all the Bruce Lee films but please - get real.

I imagine that in the first century much the same sort of thing happened to Jesus. He was dead and so his acolytes had no restraint on their increasingly wild tales about him. Lee was a 135 lb guy who never fought in an officially sanctioned event. His reputation was from fighting in TV and films where his opponents just fell down where and when required in the script.

This is akin to believing that Bela Lugosi was a real vampire. Or somewhere in the Dark Continent there really is a Wakanda.

Even if you know nothing at all about fighting, its obvious that Bruce Lee is a phony. He has all these wide open punches that are cinematic but are also very poor technique.

Unsurprising. Most all of the sword-fighting depicted in movies is unrealistic. Same for gun fights.

The best sword fighting scene I ever saw on film was the last scene of "Sanjuro" where Mifune out draws Nakadai and all this blood sprays out. Great stuff. And it set a fashion that has influenced all sorts of film makers ever since.

But it was all a mistake. The blood machine misfired and spayed out many times as much blood as Kurasawa intended. After the shot Kurasawa said "I like it, leave it in".

"The authors found no corresponding link between assaults and rallies for Mr. Trump’s Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton."
.
It helped that nobody showed up at Hillarity rallies

That was my first thought–no one showed up to Shillary’s rallies…

And certainly no on showed up to counter-protest. The prog-left has it in their mind that they’re entitled to crash any party they’re not welcome at, and then should be treated like they’re the main attraction, rather than the fart in an elevator that they are.

Sessions has not been aggressive enough (or as bad as some people say he is) but when he wakes up somebody ought to make sure he understands that there is no first amendment right to riot. I would go past that. It is screamingly clear that a small group of centrally organized professionals has been exploiting our freedoms to physically attack the public order in the hopes of legislatively attacking our government. When you fail to crush revolutionaries, they will not fail to crush you.

“Sessions has not been aggressive enough ”

Well, that’s a Ron Paul level understatement . Are you having a Ron Paul senior moment over there?

Anyway, if Jeffy was any less aggressive, he’d be guilty of misprision of treason. Come to think of it, he probably already is and only his position as AG is saving him from being indicted.

I won’t count on any action from the snoozing AG. He’s dreaming of his recusal statement right now.

Thanks for the link, Cowboy. Un-frickin'-believable! Here was my response to the article:

Are these the most self-unaware people on earth? While reading this, I kept asking myself whether this was for real, or whether it was one of those old Christopher Guest mockumentaries, like Best in Show or This is Spinal Tap.

Such hype might seem detached from reality, but it is much in vogue among the technology sector’s new generation of millionaires and billionaires, who seem keen to distance themselves from the selfish excess of their predecessors from 1980s Wall Street.

Maybe that's why movies like The Wolf of Wall Street are so popular: as shitty as the banksters are in many respects, people are actually starting to miss the era when we still had billionaires who enjoyed being billionaires. Maybe that's part of the reason behind the Trump phenomenon, too. Now, instead, we've got these whiney, lachrymose tech-billionaires who were all raised on Nirvana and want to be 'authentic'. Pitiful.

Which is probably why Silicon Valley is so keen on collaborating with the government these days to introduce internet-censorship. Musn't have the plebeians figuring out who's really running the show in this society!

Altruism is a powerful marketing brand, and Rosenthal and his friends have become experts at using the idea to promote their business. But when I ask exactly what they’ve been doing for the public good outside of their conferences, little appears to be happening.

These people should hook up with the Clinton Foundation.

Chawla is a minor celebrity on Instagram. Several years ago, he created a stir with the launch of an app called Lovematically that automatically “liked” every post on a user’s feed.

Oh, that's nice: a narcissist marketing narcissism.

Well folks, if you all thought 'Davos Man' was bad, get ready for Powder Mountain Man!

Why does Chawla dress in an American flag jumpsuit like Evel Knievel jumping the Snake River Canyon?

Imagine thinking that it matters what you do with a copy of a printed newspaper. A sad and over-elaborate description of just how ineffectual we all are. You may have meant for your remarks to be uplifting and even rebellious, but in the end they are depressing and dispiriting. Sorry.

You may have meant for your remarks to be uplifting and even rebellious, but in the end they are depressing and dispiriting.

Truthfully, I was shooting for mildly amusing.

Sorry.

It’s cool.

A word of advice, though: Never apologize. SJWs interpret it as a sign of weakness and an admission of guilt.

Lee still has devotees (should be very easy to find on YouTube) and the very rough impression I have of the martial arts community (which I have no connection to) is that he was a great popularizer and innovator. Speaking of fencing in connection to Lee, he was noted at one point for studying fencing, not to use with swords, but to find some technical application that would translate to boxing.
If you're interested in reality and falsehood in fighting and have not already, I highly suggest any article, interview, Penn and Teller BS appearance, or book by Marc Animal MacYoung, supplemented with amateur videos of actual (unrefereed) fights.

Actual swordfighting would give you bruised and possibly injured actors. I presume the same is true of movie fistfighting.

Didn't Bruce Lee have a good reputation in actual martial-arts circles? Or were those mostly bullshido circles?

Lee still has devotees (should be very easy to find on YouTube) and the very rough impression I have of the martial arts community (which I have no connection to) is that he was a great popularizer and innovator. Speaking of fencing in connection to Lee, he was noted at one point for studying fencing, not to use with swords, but to find some technical application that would translate to boxing.
If you’re interested in reality and falsehood in fighting and have not already, I highly suggest any article, interview, Penn and Teller BS appearance, or book by Marc Animal MacYoung, supplemented with amateur videos of actual (unrefereed) fights.

Even if you know nothing at all about fighting, its obvious that Bruce Lee is a phony. He has all these wide open punches that are cinematic but are also very poor technique.

Unsurprising. Most all of the sword-fighting depicted in movies is unrealistic. Same for gun fights.

Oh, you’re no fun.

The best sword fighting scene I ever saw on film was the last scene of “Sanjuro” where Mifune out draws Nakadai and all this blood sprays out. Great stuff. And it set a fashion that has influenced all sorts of film makers ever since.

But it was all a mistake. The blood machine misfired and spayed out many times as much blood as Kurasawa intended. After the shot Kurasawa said “I like it, leave it in”.

Summit prides itself on its progressive “content”, with talks about global warming, inequality, racial divisions and the war in Syria, but there is a celebrity draw, with talks such as “Jessica Alba on defying expectations” and “Andre Agassi on scaling change”.

I guess if you’re going to sit through a talk about inequality, the best place to do it is in an exclusive ski resort, surrounded by billionaires.

And I also guess that, if I wanted to know about “scaling change”, I’d ask the guy who helped make the Official All-Star Cafe such a roaring success.

It’s funny that these people are all internet people. I always thought that the whole idea of the internet was to make it so that, if you wanted to hear someone give a speech on ineqaulity, you didn’t have to fly to some exclusive resort in Utah. You could just go on the internet, and there it was. Why are these billionaires hoarding all this great information about defying expectations for themselves, and refusing to share it with the common man, for whom they have such unlimited concern?

I was long time subscriber to the New York Times print edition and spent at least two hours a day reading the paper. Later I read it daily on line. Over time I read it less and less. Now I will glance at their home page every other or third day. What I see or read scares me.

Looking at the New York Times now is like running into a friend that was once your closest friend that had drifted away. Instead of a happy reunion, it's a disturbing experience. Your once close friend now babnles on about

This is a very charming rant, both from JRoss and yourself. Personally, I quit TV news back in the 80's for being too commie. Newspapers, which can only be read in my voice, I let go in the early 90's. That was when the blessings of talk Radio really took off and suddenly I had news sources that wouldn't give me hives.

I have never willingly listened to NPR because the few times I was forced to hear it, I was reminded of why I turned off TV news almost 40 years ago. It's diabolical. Like Satan himself is in the room telling you lies that will make the rest of history wicked and destructive.

I was in a bus station waiting room on Saturday with about a dozen other people and two pigeons. I was the only white person. Two TVs were tuned to CNN, which was practically peeing its pants with excitement over McCabe’s firing, and no one was paying the slightest bit of attention.

Agree about NPR. The government should not be in the media business, no matter what the politics.